Institutionalisation beyond the Nation State: Transatlantic Relations: Data, Privacy and Trade Law PDF
Preview Institutionalisation beyond the Nation State: Transatlantic Relations: Data, Privacy and Trade Law
Studies in European Economic Law and Regulation 10 Elaine Fahey Editor Institutionalisation beyond the Nation State Transatlantic Relations: Data, Privacy and Trade Law Studies in European Economic Law and Regulation Volume 10 Serieseditors KaiPurnhagen LawandGovernanceGroup,FacultyofLaw WageningenUniversity,ErasmusUniversity WageningenandRotterdam,TheNetherlands JosephinevanZeben WorcesterCollege,UniversityofOxford ThisseriesisdevotedtotheanalysisofEuropeanEconomicLaw.Theseries’scope coversabroadrangeoftopicswithineconomicslawincluding,butnotlimitedto,the relationship between EU law and WTO law; free movement under EU law and its impact on fundamental rights; antitrust law; trade law; unfair competition law; financial market law; consumer law; food law; and health law. These subjects are approachedbothfromdoctrinalandinterdisciplinaryperspectives. The series accepts monographs focusing on a specific topic, as well as edited collections of articles covering a specific theme or collections of articles. All contributionsaresubjecttorigorousdouble-blindpeer-review. Moreinformationaboutthisseriesathttp://www.springer.com/series/11710 Elaine Fahey Editor Institutionalisation beyond the Nation State Transatlantic Relations: Data, Privacy and Trade Law Editor ElaineFahey InstitutefortheStudyofEuropean Law(ISEL) TheCityLawSchool,CityUniversity ofLondon London,UK ISSN2214-2037 ISSN2214-2045 (electronic) StudiesinEuropeanEconomicLawandRegulation ISBN978-3-319-50220-5 ISBN978-3-319-50221-2 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50221-2 LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2018937982 ©SpringerInternationalPublishingAG,partofSpringerNature2018 Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.AllrightsarereservedbythePublisher,whetherthewholeorpartofthe materialisconcerned,specificallytherightsoftranslation,reprinting,reuseofillustrations,recitation, broadcasting,reproductiononmicrofilmsorinanyotherphysicalway,andtransmissionorinformation storageandretrieval,electronicadaptation,computersoftware,orbysimilarordissimilarmethodology nowknownorhereafterdeveloped. Theuseofgeneraldescriptivenames,registerednames,trademarks,servicemarks,etc.inthispublication doesnotimply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexemptfromtherelevant protectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this bookarebelievedtobetrueandaccurateatthedateofpublication.Neitherthepublishernortheauthorsor theeditorsgiveawarranty,expressorimplied,withrespecttothematerialcontainedhereinorforany errorsoromissionsthatmayhavebeenmade.Thepublisherremainsneutralwithregardtojurisdictional claimsinpublishedmapsandinstitutionalaffiliations. Printedonacid-freepaper ThisSpringerimprintispublishedbytheregisteredcompanySpringerInternationalPublishingAGpart ofSpringerNature. Theregisteredcompanyaddressis:Gewerbestrasse11,6330Cham,Switzerland Foreword At the end of April 2017, shortly before this book went to press, the EU’s Trade Commissioner,CeceliaMalmström,metwithTrumpadministrationofficialsforthe firsttime.Inthewakeofthatmeeting,sheremarked,‘Ihope[theTransatlanticTrade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)] will come out of the freezer but [...] the new administrationneedsabitmoretimetolookatitandtoassessandtogetacquainted withitandtheyhaven'tdonethatyet’.1Thisvolumetakesadvantageofthe(perhaps permanent) hiatus in the negotiations to provide a serious, scholarly assessment of the process of institutionalisation in the transatlantic economic relationship more broadly,consideringdataprivacy,aswellastrade.AsElaineFaheydescribesinher introduction, the volume uses institutionalisation as a ‘highly provocative lexicon’ that has the ‘capacity to provoke questions of sovereignty and sensitivity towards embeddedinstitutionalisedframeworks’.2 By focusing on institutionalisation as a process, as well as an objective, this volumeilluminatesseveralfeaturesthathelptoexplainwhytheUSandtheEUhave struggled to institutionalise their trade and privacy relationship(s). A point of departure is that the transatlantic economic relationship is remarkably under- institutionalised.3 This observation is particularly striking in the light of how interpenetratedtheireconomiesare4andincomparisonbothtothetradingrelation- shipsthattheyeachhavewithothersandtothemilitaryalliancethatbindsthem.The TTIP negotiations thus represent(ed) an ambitious attempt to institutionalise trans- atlanticeconomiccooperation.Transatlanticcooperationwithrespecttotherelated, butformallyseparate,issueofdataprivacyseekstomitigatetheadverseeconomic and security implications of profoundly different domestic privacy regimes. The 1InsideUSTradeDailyReport,28April2017. 2Fahey,thisvolume. 3Fahey,thisvolume. 4HamiltonandQuinlan(2017). v vi Foreword volume’sfocusoninstitutionalisationdrawsattentiontothreeparticularlyvaluable observations. One observation is that domestic institutions—understood both as established policies and as allocations of power—can present an obstacle to international institutionalisation, at least between near peers. Both the EU and US are used to being able to export, albeit in a limited fashion, their own approaches through preferential trade agreements with ‘weaker’ parties. When they deal with each other, neither is willing to give, except at the margins.5 The intransigence of domesticinstitutionsisthecentralexplanationforthelimitednatureoftransatlantic privacycooperation.Theirownprivacyregimesaresoinstitutionalisedandresistant tochangethattransatlanticcooperationfocusesmitigatingtheeconomicandpolicy costs of those differences.6 The internal allocation of authority can also impede internationalinstitutionalisation.ThefragmentednatureoftheUS’sstandard-setting regime,forinstance,severelylimitedcooperationontechnicalbarrierstotradeinthe TTIPnegotiations.7TheverticalseparationofpowerswithintheUSconstrainedthe Obamaadministration’sabilitytomakeconcessionsintheTTIPnegotiationsonthe EU’skeyobjectiveofliberalisingsub-federalgovernmentprocurement.8IntheEU context, the vertical separation of powers for trade policy was illustrated by the Commission’sdecisiontotreattheComprehensiveEconomicandTradeAgreement (CETA)withCanadaasifitwereamixedagreement.Thisrequiredtheapprovalof everymemberstate,whichinsomeinstances,mostnotablyBelgium,alsorequired the assent of regional parliaments. The resulting ‘vetocracy’ almost scuppered the agreement.9Thus,domesticinstitutionscanbetoodifficulttochangetoaccommo- date international partners (as with data privacy), or domestic institutions can distribute power in ways that make negotiations with others difficult (as with standards,governmentprocurementandmixedagreements).Inbothunderstandings of institutions, domestic institutions acted as a break on international institutionalisation. Asecondobservationfromthisvolumeisthattransnationalagreementsoftenrely on domesticinstitutions for enforcement oroversight. BoththePrivacy Shield and theUmbrellaAgreementrelyonUSenforcementofstandardsthattheEUiswilling toconsideracceptable,evenifsomedoubtitsadequacy.10Theneedtorelyonothers toadequatelyenforcerulesisacentralchallengetoregulatorycooperation.Building thattrustwascentraltoregulatorycooperationagreementsreachedintheshadowof 5Garcia,thisvolume. 6Tzanou,thisvolume 7Purnhagen,thisvolume. 8Young(2017). 9Kleimann,thisvolume.TheCourtofJusticeoftheEU’ssubsequentrulinginOpinion2/15onthe EU-SingaporeFreeTradeAgreementinMay2017gaveabroadinterpretationoftheextentofthe EU’sexclusivecompetence,butindicatedthatprovisionsonportfolioinvestmentandinvestor-state dispute settlement fall also within the authority of the member states. CETA, therefore, was appropriatelytreatedasmixedagreement. 10Tzanou,thisvolume. Foreword vii TTIP, most notably the agreement on mutual acceptance of inspections of good manufacturingpracticesforpharmaceuticals.11Itisthistypeoftrustthatunderpins the‘incrementalinstitutionalism’intheJointEU–USFinancialRegulatoryForum.12 Othercontributionshighlighttheroleofdomesticinstitutionsinpolicingtransatlan- tic cooperation. The European Parliament has played a pivotal role in monitoring both the TTIP negotiations and transatlantic data privacy arrangements.13 There have also been the Commission’s efforts to enhance the legitimacy of the TTIP negotiationsbyconsultingtheParliament,conveningtheTTIPAdvisoryGroupand making many of its negotiating positions public. The US, however, limited the extent of that transparency by insisting that access to joint negotiating texts be restricted.14 In these instances, domestic institutions, instead of impeding inter- nationalinstitutionalisation,underpinit. The third observation from the volume is that institutionalisation can be the source of problems, not simply a way to overcome them. That TTIP sought to institutionalisetransatlanticregulatorycooperationandinvestor-state-disputesettle- ment(ISDS)wasakeyreasonwhythenegotiationsprovokedsuchintensepopular opposition in Europe.15 With respect to ISDS, the Commission sought an inter- national solution to the problem, an investor court system, which it hopes to multilateralise.16 The institutionalising ambition of TTIP also seems to be at odds with the Trump administration’s resistance to international constraints on US actions,17 which bodes ill for the prospects of resuming ambitious negotiations. This leads to the reminder that multilateral institutionalisation occurs in a narrow band,whereitisnotcontested.18Thisvolume,thus,servesasausefulreminderthat governmentsarewillingtoundertakebindingcommitmentsonlywhentheyexpect thebenefitsofbindingotherstooutweighthecostsofbeingboundthemselves. Thecontributionstothisvolume,therefore,applythelensofinstitutionalisation to recent, high-profile examples of transatlantic cooperation to highlight crucial interactions between international and domestic institutions and to remind us that institutionalisationnotbeanimpedimenttocooperationandnotjustasolutiontothe problemsofcooperation. SamNunnSchoolofInternational AlasdairR.Young Affairs,GeorgiaInstituteof Technology,Atlanta,GA,USA 11Young,ibid. 12Jančić,thisvolume. 13Moraes,thisvolume;Kleimann,thisvolume. 14Abazi,thisvolume. 15DeVilleandSiles-Brügge(2015). 16Lenk,thisvolume. 17Finbow,thisvolume. 18Titi,thisvolume. viii Foreword References DeVilleF,Siles-BrüggeG(2015)TTIP:thetruthabouttheTransatlanticTradeand InvestmentPartnership.Polity,Oxford HamiltonDS,QuinlanJP(2017)TheTransatlanticEconomy2017:annualsurveyof jobs, trade and investment between the United States and Europe. Center for TransatlanticRelations,Washington,DC YoungAR(2017)Thenewpoliticsoftrade:lessonsfromTTIP.AgendaPublishing, NewcastleuponTyne Preface ThiseditedvolumehasitsoriginsinitiallyinaworkshoponTransatlanticRelations andInstitutionalisationbeyondtheState,whichtookplaceatCityLawSchool,City, University of London in July 2016, within the Globallaw@City research series of 2015/2016academicyear,fundedbytheCityLawSchoolResearchStrategicFund Programme.Thebookispublishedagainstaverychallengingbackdroptoportray, perhapsevenofanunprecedentednature,anditwasveryexcitingtoengagewiththe contributorsdespiteof,orevenbecauseof,thesechallenges.Thanksareduetothe editors at Springer for their continuous support throughout the development of the book project. The introductory chapter has been subsequently developed and presented in many fora, particularly at NYU Law School, whilst the editor was on sabbatical there at theJean Monnet Centre in 2016/2017,and thanks aredue to all there for their lively engagement with a truly transatlantic project and for the involvementofsometheremoresubstantivelyalso. ThankstoAngelikiBraouzi,ManpreetJohal,SarahLovelaceandNurdanMekan fortheirresearchassistanceoverthecourseofthisproject.Specialthanksareowed to (in alphabetical order) Vigjilenca Abazi, Hannah Birkenkötter, Enrico Bonadio, FranciscoCosta-Cabral,MariosCosta,GráinneDeBúrca,FilippoFontanelli,Maria Garcia, David Kleimann, Nari Lee, Hannes Lenk, Peter Lindseth, Christine Landfried, Stefano Pagliari, Argyri Panezi, Kai Purnhagen, Timothy Roes, Guri Rosén,ThomasStreinz,MariaTzanou,JosephWeilerandThomasWischmeyerfor their comments and suggestions on the introductory chapter and/or for reviewing individualchaptersatvariouspointsinthedevelopmentofthebookproject. London,UK ElaineFahey June2017 ix
The list of books you might like
